Decision path
1
Fix the legal period and forum.
Identify the Act/Code, transition, appropriate Government and territorial jurisdiction.
Identify the Act/Code, transition, appropriate Government and territorial jurisdiction.
2
Freeze the evidence.
Preserve appointment, payroll, notices, orders, portal acknowledgements and witness material.
Preserve appointment, payroll, notices, orders, portal acknowledgements and witness material.
3
Read the controlling cases.
Extract the ratio, paragraph locator, relief, later treatment and factual limits.
Extract the ratio, paragraph locator, relief, later treatment and factual limits.
Source-closed Supreme Court records
Daivshala v Oriental Insurance Company Ltd
The Court held that commuting accidents can qualify where the required nexus between circumstances, time, place and employment is established; it treated section 51E as clarificatory for the interpretive issue examined.
Dr Balram Singh v Union of India
The Court issued extensive directions, treated hazardous cleaning without minimum protective safeguards as an affront to dignity and linked coercive hazardous work to Article 23.
State of Goa v Namita Tripathi
The Court applied the plain statutory definition and the welfare purpose of the Act, holding that washing and cleaning for use or delivery can fall within manufacturing process without a new marketable product being created.
Finin2min checklist
- What fact determines coverage or status?
- Who carries the evidentiary burden?
- Which authority or tribunal has jurisdiction?
- What is the limitation trigger?
- Is the cited proposition still good law after statutory change?
- What operational record would prove compliance?